Leaderboard

Those who pronounce there are no trackways in the winter have not looked from an airplane. I have and they are out there. There are trackways all over the back country in the winter. The real problem is human access on the ground. In the PNW Forest roads are unplowed with gates locked shut in the winter. To get there on the ground requires overland travel on skis or snowshoes. The next good day I will take my airplane out in Skamania Country Washington and show you trackway pictures. Tracks are all over the place, but getting there on the ground would require mounting a expedition of sorts because of road closures. I looked at the famous Skookum Meadows area from the air once in the winter. You probably could not get any closer than 50 miles in a vehicle. But there were large bipedal tracks all over the area. For those that do not know, snowmobiles are only allowed in designated areas in the Gifford Pinchot National Forest. They are prohibited everywhere else. For a vehicle to operate on a National Forest road it has to be street legal. Snowmobiles are not street legal in the State of Washington so cannot be run on National Forest Roads. So snowmobiles are not the access solution. Those areas designated as snowmobile play areas are so busy with humans and snowmobiles BF would not be anyplace near. Joint use trails are designated no motor vehicles. So to get in back country in the winter requires skis or snowshoes and starting from the nearest open road which could be dozens of miles away. The forest service intends to keep people out of the back country in the winter. Just to cut down on the vehicle stuck in the snow and lost human problem. I do not blame them for that but the result is severely limited access for those that do want to get in there in the winter.

You can' make a living in the winter without leaving lots of sign. Winter is the main reason I don't feel bf exists...at least in snow country. Most excuses you read are from folks who don't understand the conditions and reality of a real winter. t.

You can' make a living in the winter without leaving lots of sign. Winter is the main reason I don't feel bf exists...at least in snow country. Most excuses you read are from folks who don't understand the conditions and reality of a real winter. t. More special pleading just doesn't cut it. It's damned tough out there, folks, in the dead of winter. Any creature would necessarily have to move about to gather the necessary daily calories, and that leaves sign. You cannot explain that away, easily. Waiting for a sufficient theory, or explanation. Ain't hearing much.

It seems obvious they would survive just as the original Homo sapien settlers did. Make or take advantage of natural shelters, kill and store meat inside the shelters, and save their energy by kicking back on bed of moss or animal skins as long as necessary. BF hair (at least that from those southern states) is an excellent insulator; very little medulla. Stick close to home and restock the larder with local prey that burrow or travel nearby. Meat is the key; it generates the heat the body needs to survive. Disclaimer: This opinion is based on absolutely no personal knowledge, or experiences in the State of Alaska nor does the writer have any desire or intention to conduct on-site investigations to validate or discount that opinion. After spending a few hours last night on the windswept banks of the Saline River in central Arkansa when the temperature was ONLY 32 degrees while listening for Bigfoot vocals - and having the only vocal heard by my partner while I was in the van preparing the audio recording equipment - I have concluded that old age and daily aspirin intakes are no longer compatible with booger hunting in freezing weather, much less sub-freezing weather.

You are on to an issue that has been debated here at length. No sign during the winter months is difficult to reconcile where access by humans is unlimited and snow covers the area. Any creature of that size would leave sign.

FarArcher, Thanks for sharing your experiences and outlook on path forward. We still don't know what we are dealing with here with this creature. Whether it is malevolent or not, alpha predator or not, we still don't have any evidence that it has ever killed a human. Lots of rumors, innuendos, and the 411 books stirring the pot, but no evidence that a bigfoot has killed a human. It certainly has the capability and strength to kill humans; but does it have the intelligence to recognize the difference between food and cousins. I am not in the teddy bear, hug a BF camp; but neither am I on the camp that these creatures will kill you if you walk into their living area or are responsible for all the missing people in National Parks. I have read about bluff charges, scaring people by throwing rocks/sticks and by growling/screaming/howling. But, have not read a single report of somebody who got injured by a BF attack. Maybe 100% of those who got hit by a BF went missing; but that seems like a convenient excuse for a conspiracy. In this field, it is hard to draw any definitive conclusions on this mythical creature that should not exist. Explorer, I have a bit different perspective, and let me explain. I was a triple volunteer in the military, and knew for certain I was going into combat. I had the benefit of my instructors, who'd already been through multiple tours, but for two years, I asked almost every CIB holder, for three quick "Always do's" and three quick "Never do's." Hundreds. And hundreds. I heard a lot of things repeated, but I also got a lot of things that were uncommon. These replies I received were anecdotal. Every one of them. Yet the mountain of replies held truth. We're all familiar with the Trojan War. Told by Homer in the Illiad, and further written of in fragments by other writers, and written of by Roman poets Virgil and Ovid. Fantastic characters, fantastic stories, fantastic struggles, and it is all relegated to fantasy, legends, traditions, sagas, tales, and mythology. One of the more central mythical characters was Achilles. Well, an amateur actually found Troy. The real Troy. And it had been burned, built over multiple times, but the real Troy was discovered. It wasn't myth. Then, when Alexander crossed the Hellespont, we learn from Plutarch that he made a beeline for Troy, and made sacrifices to Minerva to honor those who died there, but especially the grave of Achilles, whose grave he anointed. Alexander had no trouble finding ruined Troy, nor the grave of the mythical Achilles. I think this is another example of narratives relegated to mythology, and yet when we look a bit closer, there's hard evidence to indicate that what was understood to be myth and anecdotes, in fact held truth. 'Bout this Bigfoot fellow. We find volumes of 'anecdotal' evidence, separated by decades, centuries, and millennia - told by separate peoples, cultures, nations, tribes, clans, and individuals, on different continents, regions, and terrains, called by many names - all reduced to the lowly title of anecdotal evidence. Many of these anecdotal narratives, by many cultures, over the millennia, separated by continents - all tell of a very dangerous creature, a creature many have actually warred against, ones whose names reflect them to be terrible cannibals, child stealers, child eaters, and woman stealers. So I'm supposed to ignore common sense, the preponderance of narratives over the millennia, and not draw any conclusions? Not assume these are potentially very dangerous? Not assume they are predators? Not assume they are predators of opportunity? Not assume they can even resort to cannibalism if the right, single opportunity arises simultaneously with a momentary need? I had a tiger that stalked a handful of us for three days and three nights. I killed it on the third night as it closed in - presumably to take one of us. On examination the following morning, I discovered it was an older tiger. Probably couldn't hunt very well. Probably discovered that man was an easy prey, and was bent on taking another. Maybe some older, maybe isolated, maybe outcast BF's on occasion when need and opportunity meet - will not hesitate to grab a lone person, or child - and meet an immediate need. Unfortunately, those loners who may have been taken - can't speak - can't provide direct evidence. Anyone wants to subscribe to the commonly accepted concept that these are passive, shy, generally non-confrontational - I say knock yourself out. Not me. When hundreds of narratives from disconnected peoples say the same thing - I'm taking THEIR word for it.